DOCSLIB.ORG

Texas Floods of 1940

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Texas Floods of 1940 UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OP THE INTERKT J. A. Krug, Secretary GEOl-OGICAL SURVEY , W. & Wrather, Director Water-Supply Paper 1046 TEXAS FLOODS OF 1940 BY . ' *" SETH D. BREEDING »ntt UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE WASHINGTON : 1948 For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U. S. Government Printing Office, Washington 25, D. C. CONTENTS Page Abstract ____ -___ -. 1 Introduction _____ ___. 2 Administration and personnel________ __________ 3 Acknowledgments __ __ 4 Measurement of flood discharges... ____ _____________ 4 June-July floods in south-central Texas ____ _ __ 5 Rainfall.-______.. _____ __ 8 Flood stages and discharges 15 Summary of flood stages and discharges 18 Stages and discharges at stream-gaging stations__ ________ 18 Brazos River Basin,______ __ ________ 27 Brazos River at Waco_ , ___ _ ___ 27 Brazos River near Marlin_ ________________________ . 29 Brazos River near Bryan______ __ ______ 30 Brazos River near Hempstead ____ __ 32 Brazos River near San Felipe__ ____ ________ 33 Brazos River at Richmond- ____ _-________ 35 Brazos River at East Columbia,_______ ________ 36 Little River at Cameron_ ___ 37 Yegua Creek near Somerville, _-___ ___________ 39 Navasota River near Easterly _ __________ _______ 40 Colorado River Basin._____ __ ____ 41 Colorado River at Austin ____ 41 Colorado River at Smithville __ _ ________ 43 Colorado River at La Grange.. ______ 44 Colorado River at Columbus_ _t ,.» ________ 46 Colorado River at Wha$to^_ __, .._ I i- '-- -.,- .» T 48 Colorado River nea>^y'Cityl___i?i__«^.-ii-l'_._s_^ 49 Dry Creek^at Btle§chei[I^ak® niftr ^mijfchySBjiifeJi-.______ 50 _ 51 Edna_ _ _ 53 Navidad River near Ganado___ 54 Guadalupe River Basin__________ . 55 Guadalupe River above Comal Eiver, at New Braunfels____ 56 Guadalupe River at Victoria 57 San Marcos River at Ottine_ ______ __ ___ 58 Coleto Creek near Victoria. __ 60 San Antonio River at Goliad_____ ___ _______ ______ 61 CONTENTS HI Page November floods in the San Jacinto River Basin _ 62 Meteorolbgie conditions._______ * *- - 63. Rainfall______________________________ 64 Stages and discharges at stream-gaging stations. * 69 San Jacinto River Basin_ - , 71 West Fork San Jacinto River near Conroe.*,. 71 West Fork San Jacinto River near Humble. * - 74 San Jacinto River near Huffman ______________________ 76 Sparing Creek near Spring-..- 1 ;, 78 Bast Fork San Jacinto River near Cleveland _ 80 Rainfall and runoff studies________________ 82 Discussion of results__--l_-____-_-___--_---_---------- _____ 83 Sediment.-__________________________________- 87 Previous floods________._______________' _ 88 Index.__________________________________________________________ 91 ILLUSTKATIONS Pact PLATE 1. Map of Texas showing major topographic divisions, major drain­ age basins, and average annual rainfall through 1939___ ___ 6 2. Typical stream-gaging stations: A, Recording gage and silt trap on Colorado River at Austin; B, Recording gage and neas- uring cableway on Colorado River at Columbus____ _.. 6 3. Lavaca River at Hallettsville, flood of June 30, 1940: At View toward highway bridge from near left edge of overflow; B, View from left bank at railway crossing_______________ 14 4. Lavaca River at Hallettsville, flood of June 30, 1940: A, View near center of business district; B, View of channel looking downstream from highway bridge after flood receded _______ 15 5; Isohyetal map of south-central Texas showing total rainfall June 28 to July 1,1940, and location of rainfall stations .___ In pocket 6. Isohyetal map of south-central Texas showing total rainfall June 28 to July 4, 1940, and location of stream-measurement points___-___________________________________ In pocket 7. A, Navidad River near Ganado at peak of flood of July 2,1940; B, San Jacinto River flood of November 27,1940, at highway crossing near Crosby________________________________ 74 FIGURE 1. Graphs of cumulative rainfall, in inches, at Cheapside, Lexing- ton, andSomerville, June29-3®, 1940._____________^ 9 2. Graphs of discharge at stream-gaging stations on upper B-azos River, June 25 to July 17, 1940 ________________ 20 3. Graphs of discharge at stream-gaging stations on lower Brazos River, June 25 to July 17, 1940__________________ 21 1 4. Graphs of discharge at stream-gaging stations on tributaries of Brazos River, June 28 to July 10, 1940___________ 22 5. Graphs of discharge at stream-gaging stations on Colorado River, June 28 to July 10, 1940________________ 23 IV CONTENTS Page FIGURE 6. Graph of discharge at stream-gaging station on Dry Creek at Buescher Lake, near Smithville, June 29 to July 1, 1940-___ 24 7. Graphs of discharge at stream-gaging stations in the Lavaca River Basin, June 28 to July 10, 1940__._-_____________ 25 8. Graphs of discharge at stream-gaging stations in the Guadalupe River Basin, June 28 to July 10, 1940-____-_______-__--_- 26 9. Isohyetal map of San Jacinto River Basin, Tex., showing total rainfall, in inches, November 20-26, 1940, and locations of* stream-gaging stations-. _ _______________________________ 64 10. Graphs of cumulative rainfall, in inches, at Montgomery and Shepherd, November 22-25, 1940____._______________ 68 11. Graphs of discharge at various stream-gaging stations in t^e San Jacinto River Basin, November 24 to December 20, 1940_ _ _ _ _ 70 12. Graphs of discharge at various stream-gaging station in fie San Jacinto River Basin, November 24 to December 22, 1P40___ 71 TABLES Page TABLE 1. Rainfall, in inches, June 28 to July 4, 1940__________________ 10 2. Summary of flood stages and discharges in south-central Texas for floods of June-July 1940__--___--_______.____-__----_- 16 3. Rainfall, in inches, in San Jacinto River Basin and adjacent areas, November 20-26,1940_______-______-______--_---_- 66 4. Rainfall and direct runoff of storm of June 28 to July 4, 1940, for certain areas in the Colorado and Lavaca River Basins._____ 84 5. Rainfall and direct runoff of storm of November 20-26, 1P40, in San Jacinto River Basin_________________________----____ 86 6. Silt load and runoff at measurement stations on West Fork San Jacinto, Brazos, and Colorado Rivers during flood periods, 1940________________________________- 88 TEXAS FLOODS OF 1940 By SETH D. BREEDING ABSTRACT Floods occurred'in T6xas during June, July, and November 1940, fcHt exceeded known stages on many small streams and at a few places on the larger streams. Stages at several stream-gaging stations exceeded the maximum known at those places since the collection of daily records began. A storm, haying its axis generally on a north-south line from Cameron to Vic­ toria and extending across the Brazos, Colorado, Lavaca, and Guadalupe River Basins, caused heavy rainfall over a large part of south-central Texas. The maximum recorded rain of 22.7 inches for the 2-day period June 29-30 occurred at Engle. Of this amount, 17.5 inches fell in the 12-hour period between 8 p. m. June 29, and 8 a. m. June 30. Light rains fell at a number of places on June 28, and additional light rains fell at many places within the area from July 1 to 4. During the period June 28 to July 4 more than 20 inches of rain fell over an area of 300 square miles, more than 15 inches over 1,920 square miles, ani more than 10 inches over 5,100 square miles. The average annual rainfall for the area experiencing the heaviest rainfall during this storm is about 35 inches. Farming is largely confined to the fertile flood plains in much of the area sub­ jected to the record-breaking floods in June and July. Therefore these floods, coming at the height of the growing season, caused severe losses to crops. Much damage was done also to highways and railways. The city of Hallettsville suffered the greatest damage of any urbar area. The Lavaca River at that place reached a stage 8 feet higher than ever known before, drowned several people, destroyed many homes, and submerged almost the entire business district. The maximum discharge there was 93,10C second-feet from a drainage area of, 101 square miles. Dry Creek near Sm thville produced a maximum discharge of 1,870 second- feet from an area of 1.48 square miles and a runoff of 11.3 inches in a 2-day period from a rainfall of 19.5 inches. The area in the Colorado River Basin between Smithville and La Grange, amounting to 550 square miles, had an average rainfall of 19.3 inctes, of which 11.5 inches appeared as runoff. The maximum discharge at La Grange was 182,000 second-feet, with much the greater part coming from below Smithville. This is probably a record-breaking flood for the area between Smithville and La Grange, but stages as much as 16 feet higher have occurred at La Grange. Heavy rainfall over the east half of Texas November 21-26 caused lafge floods in all streams in Texas east of the Guadalupe Riiver. The maximum recorded rainfall for the 2-day period November 24-25 was 20.46 inches at Hempstead, of which 16.00 inches fell in 24 hours or less. The storm occurred during the period November 20-26, with the greater part of the rain falling November 23-25. During the period November 20-26, rainfall in Texas amounted to more than 15 inches over an area of 3,380 square miles, and "to more than 10 inches oveof an eetea, of 17,570 square miles. The average annual rainfall for the area in Texas experiencing more than 10 inches of rain during,this storm ranges from 2 TEXAS FLOODS OF 1940 SOjinches on the east border of the State to 35 inches near the west edge of the area.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • 2018 Lavaca Basin Highlights Clean Rivers Program Report
    2018 Lavaca Basin Highlights Clean Rivers Program Report Bald Eagle at LNRA Volkmer Barn Prepared by the Lavaca-Navidad River Authority (LNRA) PO Box 429, Edna, TX 77957 PREPARED IN COOPERATION WITH THE TEXAS COMMISSION ON ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY The preparation of this report was financed in part through funding from the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality. PO Box 13087, Austin, TX 78711 1 LAVACA BASIN HIGHLIGHTS REPORT 2018 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page Acronyms 3 2017 Highlights 4 Water Quality Monitoring 14 Water Quality Conditions 19 Stakeholder Participation and Public Outreach 22 LNRA Web Site 25 Figures: Figure 1 – Doppler image of Hurricane Harvey at Landfall 5 Figure 2 – Navidad River Below Spillway 6 Figure 3 – Water Released from Palmetto Bend Dam 6 Figure 4 – Sample Location on Rocky Creek 8 Figure 5 – Texana Cove Before Weevil Release 10 Figure 6 – Texana Cove 2 Years After Weevil Release 11 Figure 7 – Adult Salvinia Weevil 11 Figure 8 - Map of Impaired Streams in the Lavaca River 13 Figure 9 - FY 2017 Lavaca Basin Monitoring Sites 16 Figure 10 - Nature Camp 22 Tables: Table 1 – Monitoring Sites for FY 2017 17 2 Acronyms AU Assessment Unit BMP Best Management Practice(s) CFS Cubic feet per second CFU Colony Forming Unit CRP Clean Rivers Program DO Dissolved Oxygen (in water) EPA Environmental Protection Agency IR Integrated Report LNRA Lavaca Navidad River Authority mg/L Milligrams per Liter PPT Parts Per Thousand RUAA Recreational Use Attainability Analysis SH State Highway SWQM Surface Water Quality Monitoring TCEQ Texas Commission on Environmental Quality TDS Total Dissolved Solids TIAER The Texas Institute for Applied Environmental Research TPWD Texas Parks & Wildlife TWRI Texas Water Resources Institute UAA Use Attainability Analysis USDA United States Agriculture Department USGS United States Geological Survey WQS Water Quality Standards WPP Watershed Protection Plan 3 2017 Basin Highlights • The Lavaca-Navidad River Basin receives an average annual rainfall of approximately 42 inches per year.
    [Show full text]
  • Stormwater Management Program 2013-2018 Appendix A
    Appendix A 2012 Texas Integrated Report - Texas 303(d) List (Category 5) 2012 Texas Integrated Report - Texas 303(d) List (Category 5) As required under Sections 303(d) and 304(a) of the federal Clean Water Act, this list identifies the water bodies in or bordering Texas for which effluent limitations are not stringent enough to implement water quality standards, and for which the associated pollutants are suitable for measurement by maximum daily load. In addition, the TCEQ also develops a schedule identifying Total Maximum Daily Loads (TMDLs) that will be initiated in the next two years for priority impaired waters. Issuance of permits to discharge into 303(d)-listed water bodies is described in the TCEQ regulatory guidance document Procedures to Implement the Texas Surface Water Quality Standards (January 2003, RG-194). Impairments are limited to the geographic area described by the Assessment Unit and identified with a six or seven-digit AU_ID. A TMDL for each impaired parameter will be developed to allocate pollutant loads from contributing sources that affect the parameter of concern in each Assessment Unit. The TMDL will be identified and counted using a six or seven-digit AU_ID. Water Quality permits that are issued before a TMDL is approved will not increase pollutant loading that would contribute to the impairment identified for the Assessment Unit. Explanation of Column Headings SegID and Name: The unique identifier (SegID), segment name, and location of the water body. The SegID may be one of two types of numbers. The first type is a classified segment number (4 digits, e.g., 0218), as defined in Appendix A of the Texas Surface Water Quality Standards (TSWQS).
    [Show full text]
  • Aquifers of the Gulf Coast of Texas
    Texas Water Development Board Report 365 Aquifers of the Gulf Coast of Texas edited by Robert E. Mace, Sarah C. Davidson, Edward S. Angle, and William F. Mullican, III February 2006 This page intentionally blank. ii Texas Water Development Board E. G. Rod Pittman, Chairman, Lufkin Thomas Weir Labatt, III, Member, San Antonio Jack Hunt, Vice Chairman, Houston James E. Herring, Member, Amarillo Dario Vidal Guerra, Jr., Member, Edinburg William W. Meadows, Member, Fort Worth J. Kevin Ward, Executive Administrator Authorization for use or reproduction of any original material contained in this publication, i.e., not obtained from other sources, is freely granted. The Board would appreciate acknowledgment. The use of brand names in this publication does not indicate an endorsement by the Texas Water Development Board or the State of Texas. With the exception of papers written by Texas Water Development Board staff, views expressed in this report are of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Texas Water Development Board. Published and distributed by the Texas Water Development Board P.O. Box 13231, Capitol Station Austin, Texas 78711-3231 February 2006 Report 365 (Printed on recycled paper) iii This page intentionally blank. iv Note from the Editors: The Gulf Coast is prominent in the history of Texas. The first sight of Texas by western explorers was our Gulf Coast. Texans defeated Santa Anna to earn their independence from Mexico amid the swamps at San Jacinto. And the oil that erupted from Spindletop, south of Beaumont, propelled Texas into the oil and gas industry. Groundwater from the Gulf Coast area has also played an important, although perhaps quieter, part of Texas’ history as well.
    [Show full text]
  • A RECREATIONAL USE SURVEY of the SAN MARCOS RIVER Thesis
    A RECREATIONAL USE SURVEY OF THE SAN MARCOS RIVER Thesis Presented to the Graduate Council of Southwest Texas State University in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements For the Degree of MASTER OF SCIENCE By David D Bradsby San Marcos, Texas May 1994 - A RECREATIONAL USE SURVEY OF THE SAN MARCOS RIVER Approved: B. G. Whiteside, Chairman Approved: TABLE OF CONTENTS List of Figures . i v List of Tables . vi Acknowledgements . vi i Introduction . 1 Recreational Literature Review . 2 San Marcos River . 6 Threatened and Endangered Species . 2 4 Methods . 27 Results.................................... 35 Discussion . 5 4 Conclusions . 6 9 Literature Cited . 7 2 iii LIST OF FIGURES Figure Page 1 . Map of the upper San Marcos River from Spring Lake to the Blanco River confluence ................ 7 2. Detailed map of the upper San Marcos River showing study areas ...... .... ..... ..... .. ... .. ....... ... .. ..... ......... ...... ... 9 3. Pepper's study area on the San Marcos River looking upstream .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ... .. .. .. .. .. 1 1 4. Sewell Park study area on the San Marcos River looking downstream............................................................... 1 3 5. City Park study area on the San Marcos River ............ 1 5 6. Rio Vista Annex study area on the San Marcos River ........... ......... .... .... .... ......... ........ .... ......... ....... 1 7 7. Rio Vista Park study area on the San Marcos River ................ ......... ....... ..... .... ........ .... ........
    [Show full text]
  • Environmental Advisory Committee Meeting December 7, 2018 10 A.M
    Environmental Advisory Committee Meeting December 7, 2018 10 a.m. to 2 p.m. CRP Coordinated Monitoring Meeting Texas Logperch (Percina carbonaria) https://cms.lcra.org/sch edule.aspx?basin=19& FY=2019 2 Segment 1911 – Upper San Antonio River 12908 SAR at Woodlawn 12909 SAR at Mulberry 12899 SAR at Padre16731 Road SAR Upstream 12908 SAR at Woodlawn 21547 SAR at VFW of the Medina River Confluence 12879 SAR at SH 97 Pterygoplichthys sp. 3 Segment 1901 – Lower San Antonio River 16992 Cabeza Creek FM 2043 16580 SAR Conquista12792 SAR Pacific RR SE Crossing Goliad 12790 SAR at FM 2506 Pterygoplichthys sp. 4 Segment 1905 – Upper Medina River 21631 UMR Mayan 12830 UMR Old English Ranch Crossing 21631 UMR Mayan Ranch 12832 UMR FM 470 5 Segment 1904 Medina Lake & 1909 Medina Diversion Lake Medina Diversion Lake Medina Lake 6 Segment 1903 Lower Medina River 12824 MR CR 2615 14200 MR CR 484 12811 MR FH 1937 Near Losoya 7 Segment 1908 Upper Cibolo Creek 1285720821 UCC NorthrupIH10 Park 15126 UCC Downstream Menger CK 8 Segment 1913 Mid Cibolo Creek 12924 Mid 14212 Mid Cibolo Cibolo Creek Upstream WWTP Schaeffer Road 9 Segment 1902 Lower Cibolo Creek 12802 Lower Cibolo Creek FM 541 12741 Martinez Creek21755 Gable Upstream FM Road 537 14197 Scull Crossing 10 Segment 1910 Salado Creek 12861 Salado Creek Southton 12870 Gembler 14929 Comanche Park 11 Segment 1912 Medio Creek 12916 Hidden Valley Campground 12735 Medio Creek US 90W 12 Segment 1907 Upper Leon Creek & 1906 Lower Leon Creek 12851 Upper Leon Creek Raymond Russel Park 14198 Upstream Leon Creek
    [Show full text]
  • Pedernales Watershed Strategic Conservation Prioritization
    PEDERNALES WATERSHED STRATEGIC CONSERVATION PRIORITIZATION The Meadows Center for Water and the Environment, Texas State University Hill Country Alliance June 2018 Produced by Siglo Group Pedernales Watershed Strategic Conservation Prioritization Project Team: Jonathan Ogren, Ben Prince, Doug Wierman, and Kaitlin Tasker www.meadowscenter.txstate.edu, [email protected], 512.245.9200 Inspiring research and leadership that ensure clean, abundant water for the environment and all humanity. www.hillcountryalliance.org, [email protected], 512.263.9147 Bringing together an ever-expanding alliance of groups throughout a multi-county region of Central Texas with the long- term objective of preserving open spaces, water supply, water quality and the unique character of the Texas Hill Country. www.siglogroup.com, [email protected], 512.699.5986 Integrating Land Use and Natural Systems: Siglo Group uses the power of geographic information to help clients integre- ate land use with natural systems. Siglo specializes in conservation planning, regional analysis, site assessment, cartogra- phy, and spatial analysis. Their work has contributed to land being set aside in perpetuity for conservation, policies, and projects that work towards more sustainable land use, good development, and a greater understanding of the attributes and value of land. Contributors: Blue Creek Consulting, [email protected], 512.826.2729 Cover Image. The Pedernales River. Courtesy of The Hill Country Alliance, www.hillcountryalliance.org 2017 TABLE OF CONTENTS SUMMARY 2 INTRODUCTION 6 STUDY AREA 8 METHODS 12 FINDINGS 20 DISCUSSION & CONCLUSIONS 22 SOURCES 26 1 Pedernales Watershed Strategic Conservation Prioritization PROJECT GOALS 1. Use the best data and analysis methods available to inform good decision making, for the efficientefficient useuse ofof hydrological,hydrological, cultural,cultural, andand ecologicalecological resourcesresources associatedassociated withwith conservationconservation inin thethe PedernalesPedernales Watershed.Watershed.
    [Show full text]
  • San Marcos River Data Report
    San Marcos River Data Report February 2011 Prepared by: Texas Stream Team River Systems Institute Texas State University – San Marcos This report was prepared in cooperation with the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality and relevant Texas Stream Team Program Partners. Funding for the Texas Stream Team is provided by a grant from the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Table of Contents Introduction ................................................................................................................................................ 1 Water Quality Parameters .......................................................................................................................... 2 Water Temperature ................................................................................................................................................................ 2 Dissolved Oxygen .................................................................................................................................................................... 3 Conductivity ............................................................................................................................................................................. 3 pH ............................................................................................................................................................................................. 4 Water Clarity ..........................................................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • 2014 Texas Surface Water Quality Standards
    Presented below are water quality standards that are in effect for Clean Water Act purposes. EPA is posting these standards as a convenience to users and has made a reasonable effort to assure their accuracy. Additionally, EPA has made a reasonable effort to identify parts of the standards that are not approved, disapproved, or are otherwise not in effect for Clean Water Act purposes. 2014 Texas Surface Water Quality Standards (updated September 23, 2014) EPA has not approved the definition of “surface water in the state” in the TX WQS, which includes an area out 10.36 miles into the Gulf of Mexico by reference to §26.001 of the Texas Water Code. Under the CWA, Texas does not have jurisdiction to establish water quality standards more than three nautical miles from the coast, but does not extend past that point. Beyond three miles, EPA retains authority for CWA purposes. EPA’s approval also does not include the application the TX WQS for the portions of the Red River and Lake Texoma that are located within the state of Oklahoma. Finally, EPA is not approving the TX WQS for those waters or portions of waters located in Indian Country, as defined in 18 U.S.C. 1151. The following sections in the 2014 Texas WQS have been approved by EPA and are therefore effective for CWA purposes: • §307.1. General Policy Statement • §307.2. Description of Standards • §307.5. Antidegradation • §307.6. Toxic Materials (see “No Action” section) • §307.8. Application of Standards (see “No Action” section) • Appendix B – Sole-source Surface Drinking Water Supplies • Appendix E – Site-specific Toxic Criteria • Appendix F – Site-specific Nutrient Criteria for Selected Reservoirs (see “No Action” section) The following sections in the 2014 Texas WQS have been approved by EPA, except for specific items as noted: • §307.3.
    [Show full text]
  • E,Stuarinc Areas,Tex'asguifcpasl' Liter At'
    I I ,'SedimentationinFluv,ial~Oeltaic \}1. E~tlands ',:'~nd~ E,stuarinc Areas,Tex'asGuIfCpasl' Liter at' . e [ynthesis I Cover illustration depicts the decline of marshes in the Neches River alluvial valley between 1956 and 1978. Loss of emergent vegetation is apparently due to several interactive factors including a reduction of fluvial sediments delivered to the marsh, as well as faulting and subsidence, channelization, and spoil disposal. (From White and others, 1987). SEDIMENTATION IN FLUVIAL-DELTAIC WETLANDS AND ESTUARINE AREAS, TEXAS GULF COAST Uterature Synthesis by William A. White and Thomas R. Calnan Prepared for Texas Parks and Wildlife Department Resource Protection Division in accordance with Interagency Contracts (88-89) 0820 and 1423 Bureau of Economic Geology W. L. Fisher, Director The University of Texas at Austin Austin, Texas 78713 1990 CONTENTS Introduction . Background and Scope of Study . Texas Bay-Estuary-lagoon Systems................................................................................................. 2 Origin of Texas Estuaries........................................................................................................ 4 General Setting.............................................................................. 6 Climate 10 Salinity 20 Bathymetry..................................... 22 Tides 22 Relative Sea-level Rise.......................................................................................................... 23 Eustatic Sea-level Rise....................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Lease Program Helps Anglers' Access to Rivers
    Lease program helps anglers' access to rivers By Shannon Tompkins April 16, 2016 Updated: April 16, 2016 11:19pm Photo: Shannon Tompkins Texas anglers are benefiting from the state's River Access and Conservation Areas program that uses federal dollars to create public river access for fishing through lease agreements with private landowners. The 30-mile-or-so stretch of the Brazos River downstream from Lake Whitney holds a wonderful bass fishery, with spectacular scenery and a world of wildlife in, over and along its course. What it didn't have until recently was a way for most anglers to access and enjoy most of that exceptional resource without a major commitment in time and effort. Distances between public access/egress points, where float-fishing anglers could put in or take out the shallow-draft, non-motorized kayaks or canoes required to navigate that section of the Brazos, were too great for a simple day-long float-fishing trip. With more than 20 miles between public access points on one section, only those willing and able to invest a couple of days – and at least one night - on the river were able to experience what the Brazos offers. But that has changed on the Brazos and several other Texas rivers as a result of a state program that leases riverside tracts from private landowners willing to allow the public to use their property as sites to access rivers for bank fishing, launch canoes and kayaks and, in a case or two, overnight camping. The result is more and better opportunities for Texas anglers to access some of the state's most extraordinary fisheries.
    [Show full text]
  • Fishery Inventory and Habitat Assessment of Spring Lake at Aquarena Center
    Fishery Inventory and Habitat Assessment of Spring Lake at Aquarena Center October 3, 2005, 2005 Raymond C. Mathews, Jr. Research Diver and Fisheries Biologist/Ecologist Texas Water Development Board Former Adjunct Professor, Texas State University Certified Fishery Scientist, American Fisheries Society Professional Wetland Scientist, Society of Wetland Scientist Senior Ecologist, The Ecological Society of America Introduction and History In order to assist Aquarena Center with their research and educational program, fishery collections were made in Spring Lake on October 31, 2002. Identifications of fishes were also made during several research diving operations through the present time. Spring Lake is a headwater lake on the San Marcos River (San Marcos, Texas; Hayes County) that was formed by a small dam originally built in 1848 as a hydroelectric facility to power a grist mill operation, and was the oldest dam in Texas. Spring Lake was formerly operated as an amusement park beginning with the first glass bottom boat ride in 1946, where the clear artesian waters gave viewers a look at the many species of fish. The glass bottom boats were followed in 1951 with the first Submarine Underwater Theatre. In 1969, “Ralph” the famous swimming pig took his first swine dive. Southwest Texas State University (now Texas State University) purchased Aquarena Springs in 1994, changing the focus of this 90-acre theme park from entertainment to preservation and education. This acquisition has enabled the University to preserve this pristine and ecologically unique site, while providing an educational experience for the public to learn about spring-flows from the Edwards Aquifer and endangered species.
    [Show full text]
  • Gonzales Project FERC Project No
    ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT FOR HYDROPOWER LICENSE Gonzales Project FERC Project No. 2960-006 Texas Federal Energy Regulatory Commission Office of Energy Projects Division of Hydropower Licensing 888 First Street, NE Washington, D.C. 20426 October 2019 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................... 1 1.1 Application .................................................................................................... 1 1.2 Purpose of Action and Need For Power ........................................................ 1 1.2.1 Purpose of Action ............................................................................ 1 1.2.2 Need for Power ................................................................................ 3 1.3 Statutory and Regulatory Requirements ....................................................... 3 1.3.1 Federal Power Act ........................................................................... 3 1.3.2 Clean Water Act .............................................................................. 4 1.3.3 Endangered Species Act .................................................................. 4 1.3.4 Coastal Zone Management Act ....................................................... 4 1.3.5 National Historic Preservation Act .................................................. 5 1.4 Public Review and Comment ........................................................................ 6 1.4.1 Scoping ...........................................................................................
    [Show full text]